Walter,
A value is a value; it can be part of a matrix of variables, but remains a value, not a policy. It only becomes policy, or an element of policy, when it is adopted, and real when implemented. You can, as you propose, selectively break values down into subsets, i.e., reciprocals of more or less parking, but values must be defended as such, and not left for their relevance to the vagaries of political winds. Hence, designers, while they need to make a living, should not surrender themselves uncritically either to interests counter to the long-term sustainablity, livability, and vitality of cities, nor a mathematical scheme proposed independently as a reliable compass.
In the final analysis, the needle will be locked in the direction of values expressed as policy, and the ratios fixed. It may not be the case that less parking means more room for development if 1) the limits on development are geographically delimited, and 2) viable design solutions allow concentration of parking segregated from the "ground" plane(s) of civic activity, i.e., as in a regional shopping center (taken as a microcosmic model for a city) not served by an alternative mass transit network: parking will (must) increase proportionally
with expansion, not be decreased inversely to it.
-------------------------------------------
Gary Collins AIA
Principal
Gary R. Collins, AIA
Jacksonville OR
-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 09-06-2011 08:38
From: Walter Hosack
Subject: Parking
Gary,
What you're talking about is a policy decision. Until you succeed, the best we can do is improve strategy and tactics. Please also see my note to David Solomon. Parking is not a given in the forecast models I mention.
-----Walter
-------------------------------------------
Walter Hosack
Author
Walter M. Hosack
-------------------------------------------